I've just finished teaching a senior seminar in which we critically analyze the 
Positive Psychology movement. This was an issue the students raised: that 
association with the broader positive thinking and new age movement could be 
destructive to the potential for the Positive Psychology movement and possibly 
Psychology as a whole. 

Paul

On Dec 9, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Jim Clark wrote:

> Hi
> 
> If you follow up many of these kinds of discussions, including this one
> and the one mentioned by Michael S. on "(New) Atheism, Scientism, and
> Open-mindedness", one in short order runs into the far-reaching fingers
> of the John Templeton organization.  Jerry Coyne has a nice (depending
> on your perspective) take on Templeton and those taking its funding:
> 
> http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/10/04/templeton-continues-to-conflate-science-and-woo/
> 
> It appears that some areas of academia besides administrators may be
> for sale, as well as our politicians.  The Positive Psychology Center at
> Penn State got several millions of dollars from Templeton during its
> early days.  Despite the truly impressive list of scholars associated
> with the center, follow the Conference link to learn about the Happiness
> 2012 conference.  What are people like Martin Seligman and Ellen Langer
> doing on the same program with someone described as follows?
> 
> "Lillian Too's 89 books on feng shui, astrology and Tibetan Buddhism
> have collectively sold over ten million copies and translated into 30
> languages. An MBA graduate of Harvard Business School, Lillian headed
> Dao Heng Bank in Hong Kong and acquired DRAGON SEED department store
> group before retiring at 45 years to become a full time mother."
> 
> No wonder it is difficult to disabuse students and the public about
> quacky ideas when practitioners of these "dark arts" are equated with
> some of our strongest scholars!
> 
> Take care
> Jim
> 
> 
> James M. Clark
> Professor of Psychology
> 204-786-9757
> 204-774-4134 Fax
> [email protected]
> 
>>>> Jeffry Ricker <[email protected]> 09-Dec-11 10:41:01
> AM >>>
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm posting this to two listservs. I apologize to those who get two
> copies of the message.
> 
> Here are some excerpts from the blog post, "Can Science Explain
> Everything?" The full text is here:
> http://chronicle.com/blogs/percolator/can-science-explain-everything/27995
> 
> 
> Best,
> Jeff
> 
> ==============
> 
> Can Science Explain Everything?
> By David Wheeler
> 
> There*s a new bully on the intellectual block, shoving scholars
> around. Lots of them are caving into the threats. The bully*s name is
> *scientism,* the belief that science has a monopoly on all real
> knowledge. All other knowledge, scientism asserts, is simply opinion,
> irrationality, or utter nonsense.
> 
> That was the perspective Ian Hutchinson, professor of nuclear science
> and engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, offered at
> an event titled *Can Science Explain Everything?* at the American
> Association for the Advancement of Science this week....
> 
> Science has two key elements, reproducibility and clarity, Hutchinson
> said. Reproducibility means essentially that an experiment done in one
> place by one person can be repeated somewhere else by someone else.
> Clarity refers to the unambiguous nature of science*s measurements,
> descriptions, and classifications. History is an example of a discipline
> that has produced real knowledge that is not scientific knowledge....
> 
> Mr. Hutchinson listed other phenomena that may be *true* but that
> he believes are outside of science*s scope: the beauty of a sunset,
> the justice of a verdict, or the terror of a war. Many humans may share
> similar perceptions of these phenomenon but the basis of those
> perceptions will lack clarity. *Ambiguity is an intrinsic part of
> these things,* he said.
> 
> Where, exactly, does God fit into this picture? Mr. Hutchinson says
> that while the universe has physical laws, God may be behind them.
> Science would be helpless to detect an act of God that violates the laws
> of physics since it would not be reproducible. Scientists should have no
> problem being religious, he said.
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jeffry Ricker, Ph.D.
> SCC: Professor of Psychology
> MCCCD: General Studies Faculty Representative
> PSY 101 Website: http://sccpsy101.wordpress.com/ 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Scottsdale Community College
> 9000 E. Chaparral Road
> Scottsdale, AZ 85256-2626
> Office: SB-123
> Phone: (480) 423-6213
> Fax: (480) 423-6298
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
> To unsubscribe click here:
> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=14799
> 
> or send a blank email to
> leave-14799-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
> To unsubscribe click here: 
> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263003&n=T&l=tips&o=14804
> or send a blank email to 
> leave-14804-13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263...@fsulist.frostburg.edu


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=14820
or send a blank email to 
leave-14820-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to